The world as the American frontier

Racialized presidential war rhetoric

Zoe¨ Hess Carney, Mary Stuckey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We use the frontier myth and the rhetoric of the Indian Wars as a heuristic for analyzing four racial valences in presidential rhetoric on the War on Terror. First, the naming of the enemy in both instances racializes and conflates identities, amplifying a potential threat and justifying a similarly amplified reaction. Second, the war zone is characterized by shifting borders and alliances, suggesting a racialized political hierarchy in which the United States wars against nonwhite tribal leaders. Third, presidents distinguish between savagery and civilization in war practices such that technology, specifically contrasted to trickery, is a marker of whiteness. Fourth, in both wars, the disciplining of nonwhite bodies is justified as the means to spreading and preserving democracy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)163-188
Number of pages26
JournalSouthern Communication Journal
Volume80
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 27 2015

Fingerprint

rhetoric
civilization
heuristics
terrorism
myth
president
threat
leader
democracy

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Communication

Cite this

@article{fa11f59b5c6f4580b1e1ca0508ae1d89,
title = "The world as the American frontier: Racialized presidential war rhetoric",
abstract = "We use the frontier myth and the rhetoric of the Indian Wars as a heuristic for analyzing four racial valences in presidential rhetoric on the War on Terror. First, the naming of the enemy in both instances racializes and conflates identities, amplifying a potential threat and justifying a similarly amplified reaction. Second, the war zone is characterized by shifting borders and alliances, suggesting a racialized political hierarchy in which the United States wars against nonwhite tribal leaders. Third, presidents distinguish between savagery and civilization in war practices such that technology, specifically contrasted to trickery, is a marker of whiteness. Fourth, in both wars, the disciplining of nonwhite bodies is justified as the means to spreading and preserving democracy.",
author = "Carney, {Zoe¨ Hess} and Mary Stuckey",
year = "2015",
month = "5",
day = "27",
doi = "10.1080/1041794X.2015.1043139",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "80",
pages = "163--188",
journal = "The Southern Communication Journal",
issn = "1041-794X",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "3",

}

The world as the American frontier : Racialized presidential war rhetoric. / Carney, Zoe¨ Hess; Stuckey, Mary.

In: Southern Communication Journal, Vol. 80, No. 3, 27.05.2015, p. 163-188.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The world as the American frontier

T2 - Racialized presidential war rhetoric

AU - Carney, Zoe¨ Hess

AU - Stuckey, Mary

PY - 2015/5/27

Y1 - 2015/5/27

N2 - We use the frontier myth and the rhetoric of the Indian Wars as a heuristic for analyzing four racial valences in presidential rhetoric on the War on Terror. First, the naming of the enemy in both instances racializes and conflates identities, amplifying a potential threat and justifying a similarly amplified reaction. Second, the war zone is characterized by shifting borders and alliances, suggesting a racialized political hierarchy in which the United States wars against nonwhite tribal leaders. Third, presidents distinguish between savagery and civilization in war practices such that technology, specifically contrasted to trickery, is a marker of whiteness. Fourth, in both wars, the disciplining of nonwhite bodies is justified as the means to spreading and preserving democracy.

AB - We use the frontier myth and the rhetoric of the Indian Wars as a heuristic for analyzing four racial valences in presidential rhetoric on the War on Terror. First, the naming of the enemy in both instances racializes and conflates identities, amplifying a potential threat and justifying a similarly amplified reaction. Second, the war zone is characterized by shifting borders and alliances, suggesting a racialized political hierarchy in which the United States wars against nonwhite tribal leaders. Third, presidents distinguish between savagery and civilization in war practices such that technology, specifically contrasted to trickery, is a marker of whiteness. Fourth, in both wars, the disciplining of nonwhite bodies is justified as the means to spreading and preserving democracy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84933499235&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84933499235&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/1041794X.2015.1043139

DO - 10.1080/1041794X.2015.1043139

M3 - Article

VL - 80

SP - 163

EP - 188

JO - The Southern Communication Journal

JF - The Southern Communication Journal

SN - 1041-794X

IS - 3

ER -